Search

Your search keyword '"Gonciarz, Maciej"' showing total 3 results
Start Over Author "Gonciarz, Maciej" Topic colonoscopy
3 results on '"Gonciarz, Maciej"'

1. Conscious analgesia/sedation with remifentanil and propofol versus total intravenous anesthesia with fentanyl, midazolam, and propofol for outpatient colonoscopy.

Author

Rudner R, Jalowiecki P, Kawecki P, Gonciarz M, Mularczyk A, and Petelenz M

Subjects
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Ambulatory Surgical Procedures, Female, Fentanyl pharmacology, Humans, Hypnotics and Sedatives administration & dosage, Male, Midazolam pharmacology, Middle Aged, Pain Measurement, Propofol administration & dosage, Remifentanil, Anesthesia, General, Colonoscopy, Conscious Sedation, Hypnotics and Sedatives pharmacology, Piperidines pharmacology, Propofol pharmacology
Abstract

Background: This study tested the hypothesis that, for colonoscopy, analgesia/sedation with remifentanil and propofol might be more effective compared with anesthesia by intravenous administration of midazolam, fentanyl, and propofol., Methods: In a prospective, randomized trial, 100 adult patients received either conscious analgesia/sedation (Sedation group) or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA group). Analgesia/sedation was achieved by infusion of remifentanil (0.20 to 0.25 microg/kg/min) and propofol in titrated doses. TIVA was induced by intravenous administration of fentanyl (2 microg/kg), midazolam (0.05 mg/kg) and propofol (dosage titrated). Cardiorespiratory parameters and bispectral index were monitored and recorded. The quality of the analgesia was assessed with a Numerical Pain Rating Scale (NRS); recovery level and return of psychomotor efficiency were evaluated with, respectively, the Aldrete scale and a Modified Post Anesthesia Discharge Scoring (MPADS) system., Results: Both groups of 50 patients were comparable with respect to demographic data, initial parameters, and duration of colonoscopy. All patients in the TIVA group found the colonoscopy painless (NRS score 0). In the Sedation group, the average pain intensity score was 0.4 (0.8). There was a marked difference between the Sedation and TIVA groups with respect to the time from the end of the procedure until the maximum MPADS score was reached: respectively, -6.9 (4.0) versus 25.7 (8.4) minutes (p < 0.001). In the TIVA group, changes in mean arterial pressure and heart rate and signs of respiratory depression were significant (p < 0.05)., Conclusions: Combined administration of remifentanil and propofol for colonoscopy provides sufficient analgesia, satisfactory hemodynamic stability, minor respiratory depression, and rapid recovery, and allows patients to be discharged approximately 15 minutes after the procedure.

Published
2003
Full Text
View/download PDF

2. Etrolizumab versus adalimumab or placebo as induction therapy for moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (HIBISCUS): two phase 3 randomised, controlled trials

Author

David T Rubin, Iris Dotan, Aaron DuVall, Yoram Bouhnik, Graham Radford-Smith, Peter D R Higgins, Daniel S Mishkin, Pablo Arrisi, Astrid Scalori, Young S Oh, Swati Tole, Akiko Chai, Kirsten Chamberlain-James, Stuart Lacey, Jacqueline McBride, Julian Panés, Abdulkhakov Rustem, Abu Bakar Norasiah, Aguilar Humberto, Aizenberg Diego, Akpinar Hale, Akriviadis Evangelos, Alexeeva Olga, Alikhanov Bagdadi, Alvarisqueta Andres, Ananthakrishnan Ashwin, Andrews Jane, Arlukowicz Tomasz, Atkinson Nathan, Atug Ozlen, Bafutto Mauro, Balaz Jozef, Bamias George, Banic Marko, Baranovsky Andrey, Barbalaco Neto Guerino, Basaranoglu Metin, Baum Curtis, Baydanov Stefan, Bennetts William, Besisik Fatih, Bhaskar Sudhir, Bielasik Andrzej, Bilianskyi Leonid, Bilir Bahri, Blaha Pavol, Bohman Verle, Borissova Julia, Borzan Vladimir, Bosques-Padilla Francisco, Bouhnik Yoram, Brooker James, Budko Tetiana, Budzak Igor, Bunganic Ivan, Chapman Jonathon, Che' Aun Azlida, Chernykh Tatiana, Chiorean Michael, Chopey Ivan, Christodoulou Dimitrios, Chu Pui Shan, Chumakova Galina, Cummins Andrew, Cunliffe Robert, Cvetkovic Mirjana, Dagli Ulku, Danilkiewicz Wit Cezary, Datsenko Olena, de Magalhães Francesconi Carlos Fernando, Debinski Henry, Deminova Elena, Derova Jelena, Ding John Nik, Dmitrieva Julia, Dolgikh Oleg, Douda Tomas, Drobinski Piotr, Dryden Gerald, Duarte Gaburri Pedro, DuVall George Aaron, Dvorkin Mikhail, Ennis Craig, Erzin Yusuf, Fadieienko Galyna, Fediv Oleksandr, Fedorishina Olga, Fedurco Miroslav, Fejes Roland, Fernandez Jorge, Fernandez Monica Lorena, Flores Lucky, Freilich Bradley, Friedenberg Keith, Fuster Sergio, Gawdis-Wojnarska Beata, Gil Parada Fabio Leonel, Gimenez Edgardo Daniel, Golovchenko Nataliia, Golovchenko Oleksandr, Gonciarz Maciej, Gonen Can, Gordon Glenn, Gregus Milos, Grinevich Vladimir, Guajardo Rodriguez Rogelio, Hall Stephen, Hanson John, Hartleb Marek, Hebuterne Xavier, Hendy Peter, Herring Robert, Hetzel David, Higgins Peter, Hilal Raouf, Hilmi Ida Normiha, Hlavaty Tibor, Holman Richard, Holtmann Gerald, Hong John, Horvath Frantisek, Hospodarskyy Ihor, Hrstic Irena, Hulagu Sadettin, Ibarra Verdugo Luis Alberto, Ibegbu Ikechukwu, Inns Stephen, Ivashkin Vladimir, Izanec James, Jain Rajesh, Jamrozik-Kruk Zofia, Kamburov Victor, Karagiannis John, Karakan Tarkan, Karczewski Marek, Kasherininova Irina, Katz Seymour, Kaufman Barry, Kazenaite Edita, Kholina Irina, Khurana Sunil, Kierkus Jaroslaw, Kiselevska Anzela, Kleczkowski Dariusz, Klymenko Volodymyr, Knezevic Slavko, Kondusz-Szklarz Malgorzata, Korablina Natalya, Korczowski Bartosz, Kosturkov Lyubomir, Kotzev Iskren, Kouklakis Georgios, Koutroubakis Ioannis, Krause Richard, Kronborg Ian, Krstic Miodrag, Krznaric Zeljko, Krzyzanowski Mikolaj, Kulig Grazyna, Kull Karin, Kupcinskas Limas, Lamet Mark, Latinovic Radakovic Tatjana, Leong Rupert, Leung Wai Keung, Levine Henry, Li Michael Kin Kong, Libanez Bessa Campelo Braga Lúcia, Livzan Maria, Lohdanidi Tetiana, Louzada Pereira Maria Helena, Lowe John, Luetic Kresimir, Lukas Milan, Lymar Yurii, Macrae Finlay, Mäelt Anu, Maev Igor, Mamos Arkadiusz, Mantzaris Gerasimos, Margus Benno, Marinova Ivanka, Markevych Inna, Markov Mario, Markovic Srdjan, Marquez Velasquez Juan Ricardo, Mazzoleni Felipe, Mimidis Konstantinos, Mitchell Brent, Moore Gregory, Morales Garza Luis Alonso, Moscatello Salvatore, Mostovoy Yuriy, Mountifield Reme, Nagorni Aleksandar, Neshta Viacheslav, Obrezan Andrey, Oliinyk Oleksandr, Oliveira Santana Silva Genoile, Orzeszko Maria, Pavlenko Vladimir, Pavlov Dimitar, Penkova Mariana, Peric Sasa, Petkov Plamen, Petrov Asen, Petrov Plamen, Petrova Michaela, Phillips Raymond, Pintor Chacon Sergio, Polianskyi Igor, Prystupa Ludmyla, Pugach Mykhailo, Pugas Carvalho Ana Teresa, Pukitis Aldis, Pumprla Jiri, Pyrogovskyy Volodymyr, Racz Istvan, Radford-Smith Graham, Raja Ali Raja Affendi, Ramos Castañeda Daniel, Ramos Júnior Odery, Rausher David, Rebrov Andrey, Regula Jaroslaw, Rezk Amir, Reznikova Viktoriia, Rishko Iaroslava, Roblin Xavier, Rodoman Grigory, Rojas Rodriguez Carlos Arturo, Rozciecha Jerzy, Rubin David, Rupinski Maciej, Rzucidlo Jacek, Sablin Oleg, Sahin Halil, Salleh Rosemi, Samuel Douglas, Scafuto Scotton Antonio, Schnabel Robert, Schulman Michael, Schultz Michael, Scott John, Sedghi Shahriar, Shaban Ahmad, Shapina Marina, Shaposhnikova Natalia, Shchukina Oksana, Sherman Alex, Shumikhina Irina, Simanenkov Vladimir, Simonov Vladislav, Simulionis Giedrius, Skrypnyk Igor, Sliwowski Zbigniew, Smid Jan, Solaiman Mahmood, Soofi Najm, Soufleris Konstantinos, Spassova Zoia, Stanislavchuk Mykola, Stec-Michalska Krystyna, Stifft Jonathas, Stoinov Simeon, Stoyanova Girgina, Sultan Keith, Surace Lindsey, Takov Dimitar, Tälli Jaak, Tankova Ludmila, Tanno Hugo, Tarabar Dino, Tarakji Elias, Tchernev Konstantin, Tee Hoi Poh, Thin Lena, Thomas Carlton, Tishaeva Irina, Todorova Tsveta, Tokarenko Oleksandr, Tolmanis Ivars, Tomasevic Ratko, Trofimov Vasiliy, Tulassay Zsolt, Unsal Belkis, Uzunova-Genova Alma, Valentine John, Valuyskikh Ekaterina, Vasconcellos Eduardo, Vasileva Galina, Vasylyuk Sergiy, Vaughn Byron, Velazquez Francisco, Vizir Vadym, Vladimirov Borislav, Volfova Miroslava, Vyhnalek Petr, Wallace Ian, Waluga Marek, Watkins William, Weber John, Wiechowska-Kozlowska Anna, Winstead Nathaniel, Wojtkiewicz Pawel, Wozniak-Stolarska Barbara, Yacyshyn Bruce, Yakovlev Alexey, Younes Ziad, Yukie Sassaki Lígia, Yuksel Ilhami, Zachar Jan, Zaltman Cyrla, Zdravkovic Petrovic Natasa, Zhdan Vyacheslav, Zinchenko Maryna, and Zymla Maciej

Subjects
Ulcerative Colitis Flare, Adult, Male, medicine.medical_specialty, Adolescent, Population, Placebo, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized, Gastroenterology, Severity of Illness Index, Placebos, Young Adult, Double-Blind Method, Gastrointestinal Agents, Internal medicine, Adalimumab, Medicine, Humans, Adverse effect, education, Aged, education.field_of_study, Hepatology, business.industry, Remission Induction, Colonoscopy, Induction Chemotherapy, Middle Aged, medicine.disease, Symptom Flare Up, Ulcerative colitis, Concomitant, Etrolizumab, Colitis, Ulcerative, Female, business, medicine.drug
Abstract

Summary Background Etrolizumab is a gut-targeted anti-β7 integrin monoclonal antibody. In an earlier phase 2 induction study, etrolizumab significantly improved clinical remission relative to placebo in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. The HIBISCUS studies aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of etrolizumab to adalimumab and placebo for induction of remission in patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis. Methods HIBISCUS I and HIBISCUS II were identically designed, multicentre, phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled studies of etrolizumab, adalimumab, and placebo in adult (18–80 years) patients with moderately to severely active ulcerative colitis (Mayo Clinic total score [MCS] of 6–12 with an endoscopic subscore of ≥2, a rectal bleeding subscore of ≥1, and a stool frequency subscore of ≥1) who were naive to tumour necrosis factor inhibitors. All patients had an established diagnosis of ulcerative colitis for at least 3 months, corroborated by both clinical and endoscopic evidence, and evidence of disease extending at least 20 cm from the anal verge. In both studies, patients were randomly assigned (2:2:1) to receive subcutaneous etrolizumab 105 mg once every 4 weeks; subcutaneous adalimumab 160 mg on day 1, 80 mg at week 2, and 40 mg at weeks 4, 6, and 8; or placebo. Randomisation was stratified by baseline concomitant treatment with corticosteroids, concomitant treatment with immunosuppressants, and baseline disease activity. All patients and study site personnel were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was induction of remission at week 10 (defined as MCS of 2 or lower, with individual subscores of 1 or lower, and rectal bleeding subscore of 0) with etrolizumab compared with placebo. Pooled analyses of both studies comparing etrolizumab and adalimumab were examined for several clinical and endoscopic endpoints. Efficacy was analysed using a modified intent-to-treat population, defined as all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02163759 (HIBISCUS I), NCT02171429 (HIBISCUS II). Findings Between Nov 4, 2014, and May 25, 2020, each study screened 652 patients (HIBISCUS I) and 613 patients (HIBISCUS II). Each study enrolled and randomly assigned 358 patients (HIBISCUS I etrolizumab n=144, adalimumab n=142, placebo n=72; HIBISCUS II etrolizumab n=143; adalimumab n=143; placebo n=72). In HIBISCUS I, 28 (19·4%) of 144 patients in the etrolizumab group and five (6·9%) of 72 patients in the placebo group were in remission at week 10, with an adjusted treatment difference of 12·3% (95% CI 1·6 to 20·6; p=0·017) in favour of etrolizumab. In HIBISCUS II, 26 (18·2%) of 143 patients in the etrolizumab group and eight (11·1%) of 72 patients in the placebo group were in remission at week 10, with an adjusted treatment difference of 7·2% (95% CI –3·8 to 16·1; p=0·17). In the pooled analysis, etrolizumab was not superior to adalimumab for induction of remission, endoscopic improvement, clinical response, histological remission, or endoscopic remission; however, similar numerical results were observed in both groups. In HIBISCUS I, 50 (35%) of 144 patients in the etrolizumab group reported any adverse event, compared with 61 (43%) of 142 in the adalimumab group and 26 (36%) of 72 in the placebo group. In HIBISCUS II, 63 (44%) of 143 patients in the etrolizumab group reported any adverse event, as did 62 (43%) of 143 in the adalimumab group and 33 (46%) in the placebo group. The most common adverse event in all groups was ulcerative colitis flare. The incidence of serious adverse events in the pooled patient population was similar for etrolizumab (15 [5%] of 287) and placebo (seven [5%] of 144) and lower for adalimumab (six [2%] of 285). Two patients in the etrolizumab group died; neither death was deemed to be treatment related. Interpretation Etrolizumab was superior to placebo for induction of remission in HIBISCUS I, but not in HIBISCUS II. Etrolizumab was well tolerated in both studies. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Published
2021

3. Guidelines for the management of ulcerative colitis. Recommendations of the Polish Society of Gastroenterology and the Polish National Consultant in Gastroenterology.

Author

Eder, Piotr, Łodyga, Michał, Gawron-Kiszka, Magdalena, Dobrowolska, Agnieszka, Gonciarz, Maciej, Hartleb, Marek, Kłopocka, Maria, Małecka-Wojciesko, Ewa, Radwan, Piotr, Reguła, Jarosław, Zagórowicz, Edyta, Banasiewicz, Tomasz, Durlik, Marek, and Rydzewska, Grażyna

Subjects
*ULCERATIVE colitis, *GASTROENTEROLOGY, *LIKERT scale, *CONSULTANTS
Abstract

This paper is an update of the diagnostic and therapeutic recommendations of the National Consultant for Gastroenterology and the Polish Society of Gastroenterology from 2013. It contains 49 recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment, both pharmacological and surgical, of ulcerative colitis in adults. The guidelines were developed by a group of experts appointed by the Polish Society of Gastroenterology and the National Consultant in the field of Gastroenterology. The methodology related to the GRADE methodology was used to assess the quality of available evidence and the strength of therapeutic recommendations. The degree of expert support for the proposed statements was assessed on a 6-point Likert scale. Voting results, together with comments, are included with each statement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2023
Full Text
View/download PDF

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results